Ask a Black Girl Anything . . .

[mista geechee]

Actually that's exactly what it means.

If that is exactly what it meant, that would mean that every black child and parent in teh US was part of the study in question. Which obviously isn't true.

Gullible, ignorant, and presumptuous. Wow. You've achieved the trifecta of stupidity.

 

[ZOS23xy]

No I was pointing out the hypocricy of telling someone oral sex will make her a whore when she was most likely born out of wedlock in the first place. Seems like fucked up morals to me is all.

Your run on sentence reveals no logic structure, and your conclusions are personal bias. Considering the other nattering blathery posts your typed out (it ain't writing) the generosity of my giving time to pursue your posts is something you can take to heart.

 

[javyn]

Um....you have no idea how statistics works do you?

First you take a sample size representative of the population, and make inferences from that. Now if you want to argue this particular sample was biased, you can do that, if you had the data in front of you and knew how to interpret it.

You don't have to poll every black person in the country just like they don't have to poll every person in the country to see who is ahead in a presidential race, and Nielsen doesn't need to put a box on every single television set in America to see what shows are popular.

My background is in economics and statistics. Sorry Mista, but you pointed out your own ignorance here, not mine.

 

[javyn]

Your run on sentence reveals no logic structure, and your conclusions are personal bias.

If you think my sentence was a runon, I challenge you to fix it.

Also, what conclusions have I drawn? I was asking a question....I didn't make any conclusion other than the 70% of blacks born out of wedlock statistic, which wasn't my conclusion in the first place.

edit: also, if you have to resort to ad hom attacks and pointing out imagined flaws in grammar, I'd say you are grasping at straws here. Funny that you are leveling accusations of being "egotards" when you are displaying that trait more than anyone.

 

[ZOS23xy]

obviously its is easier to ignore reality than face it. Ignorance is bliss. You keep eating that sausage. Im not here to look at dicks, im here to shine some light in a dark room. The same dark room in which there is a sausage in your mouth.

You must be using a very small bulb with very small wattage and very small photon expulsion. It must be a black hole.

 

[javyn]

Another ad hom attack.

 

[mista geechee]

Um....you have no idea how statistics works do you?

First you take a sample size representative of the population, and make inferences from that. Now if you want to argue this particular sample was biased, you can do that, if you had the data in front of you and knew how to interpret it.

You don't have to poll every black person in the country just like they don't have to poll every person in the country to see who is ahead in a presidential race, and Nielsen doesn't need to put a box on every single television set in America to see what shows are popular.

My background is in economics and statistics. Sorry Mista, but you pointed out your own ignorance here, not mine.

Nope, sorry that's you. Doesn't matter what your background is. It's plain ignorant to take a study of a small amount of a population within a population and project that onto the whole. It reflects stereotyping and other worldly ignorance.

 

[javyn]

No, it's basic statistics. Sorry if you can't understand that.

here is a link explaining sampling, which is using a small, randomly selected group from an entire population to draw conclusions about that population. It is done in every single statistic you have ever encountered in your life except for the US Census, which is the only one that actually measures an entire population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)

Granted, you cannot get a 100% accurate result from sampling like this, which is why every stat you see will have a "margin of error", of plus or minus 2% for example, to take into account the slight variations that could be in the population at large.

 

[javyn]

Oh, I'd be willing to give you basic statistic and math lessons for a nominal fee if you want, as well as English lessons for ZOS23

 

[mista geechee]

No, it's basic statistics. Sorry if you can't understand that.

here is a link explaining sampling, which is using a small, randomly selected group from an entire population to draw conclusions about that population. It is done in every single statistic you have ever encountered in your life except for the US Census, which is the only one that actually measures an entire population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(statistics)

Granted, you cannot get a 100% accurate result from sampling like this, which is why every stat you see will have a "margin of error", of plus or minus 2% for example, to take into account the slight variations that could be in the population at large.

Sorry, won't cut it. The only stats that can be trusted is the census since it actually includes teh majority or each category in question.

You can take all the samples of a small group that you want to, that doesn't mean that they represent the majority.

But hold on to that axiom if you must. I'm done here.

And you should probably check your spelling so that your links go to pages that actually exist. I doubt anyone would be desperate enough to take any lessons from such an ignorant mind as yours.

 

[javyn]

You can take all the samples of a small group that you want to, that doesn't mean that they represent the majority.

Maybe not in your mind, but thankfully, the entire educated world disagrees with you.

 

[javyn]

OH yeah, and don't be so quick to trust the Census since millions of whites and hispanics refuse to fill out the form.

 

[javyn]

Also, think I should point out that since you don't believe sampling is a valid measure, then the entire fields of psychology, economics, sociology, and all the hard sciences are therefore bullshit as well since every social and natural science depends on sampling to draw it's conclusions.

Not to mention, you must not believe that businesses use sampling to predict failure rates of machines on the assembly line and how many spare parts to order, etc.

Or that every business out there uses sampling to determine how much of any stock or inventory to order.

Just curious....How exactly do you think the world works? Do you think to draw a conclusion you need to measure EVERY instance in the population?

What about when the population is infinite? Say, trying to predict how many calls a 911 dispatcher will receive at any given hour so the government knows how many to hire and have working on certain hours? Can't exactly measure infinity can you? Then again, they seem to do FINE using sampling now don't they?

Oh here's a link explaining how to take a sample so that it is representative of the population. Yet another moron with a PhD eh?


http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/PD006

 

[javyn]

Oh yeah do you have a Nielsen box on your television? Obviously Nielsen, if their ratings are to be accurate, would have to put one on every single television in America to see how the shows rank, since taking a sample from the population at large is obviously a flawed practice. I mean, advertisers wouldn't pay Nielsen for that data if they weren't sure the statistics are as accurate as possible, their money is on the line!

Here's a link with an animation of balls dropping randomly and how they end up being placed. It illustrates the normal distribution, proving the validity of sampling.

And since it's an animation, there's no words or math, easy!

Balldrop

See how even though the balls fall at random, they still mostly fall within that curve? That's called the bell curve. Further evidence of the validity of sampling.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Mista, ZOS, you both are receiving tickets for feeding a troll. Your punishment is a swift, sturdy spanking.:wink: PLEASE, for the sake of NJ's thread, STOP ANSWERING JAVYN. If u won't do it for me, do it for our sweetheart NJ, I'd hate to see her thread go down like so many others that went this same exact route.

 

[javyn]

Yeah, none of you can intellectually defeat my argument so I expected to be branded a troll. Desperate measures by desperate folks.

 

[marleyisalegend]

Yeah, none of you can intellectually defeat my argument so I expected to be branded a troll.

Of course not, but it's not because your argument is so rock-solid. Trying to defeat your argument here would be like trying to be defeat Santa Claus....think about it. And "defeat"? What are you, 12 years old playing Star Troopers?

Desperate measures by desperate folks.

Ur right, we're wrong, we give up. You happy now?

 

[javyn]

No really I was hoping you'd read what I posted and try not to be so ignorant. It actually made me sad that there are people out there who still stubbornly refuse to accept logic and reason.

edit: So for what it's worth, we both lost here.

 

[marleyisalegend]

NJ, how do you feel about Dr. Phil? Legit counselor or fraud?

 

[ZOS23xy]

No really I was hoping you'd read what I posted and try not to be so ignorant. It actually made me sad that there are people out there who still stubbornly refuse to accept logic and reason.

edit: So for what it's worth, we both lost here.

Aw, no one wins here anyway. Statistics are a mixed bag. If you sample out various data, you can prove just about anything.

I have a book on my shelves which is called HOW TO LIE WITH STATISTICS, which goes ahead and samples data, and by tinkering with inputs, outputs and forwarding conclusions, you can draw many conclusions.

It is not that logic and reason are ignored, it is what can be shaped out of data, the intent and the outcome. Recall the current Bush administration saying that global warming isn't real by the scientists they were selecting to comment on the issue. They ignored anyone who disagreed with them.